Not as good as first one, but still rocks 8/10! - Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011) Discussion

[–] Erazer528 13 years ago

How about you write WHY you think the original is better? Opening a thread about your rating is pretty pointless if you don't explain.

This would really interest me, because I actually never understand people who think that the first movie is better than this one. Sure, it's a good movie, but I think the sequel blows the original out of the water. The story is overall better and not as predictable as the first one, the humour is more varied (most of the jokes in the original just were about Po's clumsiness), the action is awesome (the first movie had better one-on-one fighting though), and I think the story about Po finding out who he is was really touching.

For me, it's quite strange to see the original being rated better than this sequel... The first movie is good, but not great. Not like this one.

reply

[–] Walter_Roehrich 13 years ago

In my opinion the original had the simple advantage of being new. We were introduced to a completely new story and characters. Due to this new setting the original seemed to have a suprise effect which is missing in the sequel (since we already know most of the characters). I assume thats why sequels have in general a lower rating.

For me, both movies are on the same level.
---
That's just weak songwriting. You wrote a bad song, Petey.

reply

[–] vibor123 13 years ago

Why was the first one better:

1.Original charaters, everything was new

2.Humor was waaaaaay better, don't get me wrong, I laugh at this one as well, but the first one was funnier, Po clumsiness, way of speech (Jack Black rules), Po's father....in sequel the jokes were good, but we already seen them in first movie

3.Oogway was (exept Po) best character of the series, I adore him, so mysticall...

4.Action was great in both of them, but I prefer first one because it was original and that scene where that BAD TIGER rund out of prison is legendary

5.The whole concept was better, the story, characters, action, humor...

Last I saw:
Melancholia 5.5/10
Kung Fu Panda 2 8/10

reply

[–] Pedosh 13 years ago

The first film was a lot better. As a story it was far more involving (character wise). This film was too focused on Po and very linear. I found the animation superior in the first. Tai Lung was a great villain (fantastic dungeon/escape sequence)where as Lord Shen had no gravitas and he never felt dangerous/menacing. The Furious Five 5 were sadly overlooked in the sequel (much to its detriment).

For me Po has never been the 'star' attraction of the films, he's too obvious and self referential/mocking for my taste. Perhaps that's why this film, where Po is the sole focus, is so flat for me. Without Shifu, Tigress or Tai Lung to add an extra level of seriousness/conflict to proceedings it feels more like the children film it is and not the children/adult cross-over I'd hoped for.

Kung Fu Panda: 7
Kung Fu Panda 2: 5

reply

[–] vibor123 13 years ago

Kung Fu Panda: 9
Kung Fu Panda 2: 8

Last I saw:
Melancholia 5.5/10
Kung Fu Panda 2 8/10

reply

[–] simbabarellroll 13 years ago

Both: 10/10

"Simba, you have forgotten me"
"No, I am your father"
"NOO, THIS IS PATRICK"
"Do'h"

reply

[–] MarshmallowMoo 13 years ago

I seriously can't see why people think the first is better. The first is really goofy and a bit asinine. The second film added drama, emotional depth, and scale. Not to mention the soundtrack is superior and the 3D is FANTASTIC. The villain is also a bit more believable; I could understand his intentions better. Maybe people don't appreciate emotional depth in animated films? But then Pixar wouldn't do so well. Who knows.

You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.

reply

[–] monstermayhem32 13 years ago

I think that the 2nd one was better, since it added more backstory and development to the characters particularly PO. I know that the adoption part was rather obvious but the film was pretty good. The first film is good but it was introducing the characters and all.

reply

[–] Meats_Of_Evil 13 years ago

I liked the first one better. The jokes on this one weren't as funny, I still laughed but the joked felt old. The villain was pretty weak imo, he didn't feel menacing and his story felt like something they thought of at the last minute, I like the villain from the first movie better as he felt more menacing to the entire furious five. The background story was interesting but since it was rushed throughout the movie I didn't felt emotionally attached to it. Also the other characters in this movie are pretty bland, most of the time I felt as If they didn't matter since their interaction or lines were virtually none, I was asking myself if the original voice actors were in this or not because of that.

Still the ending was interesting I hope the next movie turns out better.

reply

[–] sadfilmophile 13 years ago

I sort of watched this DVD with kids on a sleep deprived weekend afternoon, so when I watched it in the cinema hall today I'd already seen all the visuals but hadnt heard some of the dialogues.

Oh my God! for a second viewing I could not believe how much I enjoyed this movie. THERE ARE SO MANY LAUGH OUT LOUD MOMENTS. I was blown away by the animation and jokes and fighting and characterisation. It was all superb; the fighting sequences were superior or on par of many a martial arts classics. The coolness quotient was so much better conveyed in this movie; in the first movie the famous five dont get to show us they are awesome we just keep hearing about it from Po. But here the scenes with Tigress were amazing. Also, within the group, the touches with "I've never said anything like that" , "And she's back" - these all helped to zoom in closer to the friendship between the five. In the first movie the five had great teamwork, but in this one they have great friendship/dynamic/chemistry.

The kids I took with me (which makes me sound like some weirdo) loved the cinema version better as well.

Excellent movie, excellent movie. (You must imagine Shifu saying that with a Rainman crick in his neck. Aw man, would love to have a gif like that.)

10/10.

reply

[–] AntDude 11 years ago

I also like the sequel more than the first one too, but not that much more.
--
Ant @ The Ant Farm (http://antfarm.ma.cx) and Ant's Quality Foraged Links (http://aqfl.net).

reply

[–] cooget 13 years ago

I liked the first one a lot more.

Things that make the first Kung Fu Panda better:

* The Samurai Jack style intro.
* The Po's training.
* The Po vs Sifu chopstick fight.
* Master Oogway.
* Tai Lung's escape.
* The bridge fight.

I also found the first one a lot funnier, with less forced humor, better action scenes and a "better" villain (Shen was pretty one-dimensional IMO).

Also the first film seemed more "full", with more things happening. The second one seemed like one big final fight, and it seemed pretty rushed.

Kung Fu Panda : 10/10
Kung Fu Panda 2: 7/10

reply

[–] Erazer528 13 years ago

Shen was pretty one-dimensional

what.

WHAT.

Lord Shen has to be the very opposite of a one-dimensional villain. I even think he's up there with Scar and Jafar as one of the greatest animated villains ever put to film. He's evil and unpredictable (he commits a genocide!), a tragic figure ("My parents hated me..."), but you can also laugh about him - and he's voiced by Gary Oldman, who gave nothing less than one of the best voice acting performances I've ever seen.(well, heard).

He is very different than Tai Lung, since he is not only threatening because of his physical strenght. Don't get me wrong, I liked Tai Lung, but especially the final fight kind of ruined it for me. All the way through, he's a badass, but confronting Po, he's downplayed to a complete wimp. It makes sense that Po can defeat him with his own ways, that isn't my problem with it - but Po giggling moronically fighting against the now weak Tai Lung ruined all the epicness about the villain and wasn't very satisfying. The sequel was another case - that showdown on the water with the cannons must be the very definition of epicness.

Kung Fu Panda 1 is good - but Kung Fu Panda 2 is great.

Kung Fu Panda 1: 7/10
Kung Fu Panda 2: 9/10

reply

[–] cooget 13 years ago

While I also liked Gary Oldman's voice acting which gave Shen some class, I saw Shen like the typical villain which thinks his parents hate him (aren't most of the villains like this?) which will stop at nothing to conquer the world. I didn't find at all surprising that he commited genocide, it is one of the characteristics of villains that would stop at nothing to conquer the world.

It's true that Tai Lung is the typical villain that would stop at nothing to have his revenge, but at least he seemed to be affected (emotionally) by Shifu regrets. Shen was more cold hearted, what the soothsayer told him only made him think for about 1-2 seconds. For me, this makes him more one-dimensional.

reply

[–] TheHiawatha 11 years ago

I thought they were equal. The first film used humor well and had absolutely incredible fight scenes. The second film had a better-written story and featured better character development for Po. And the villains in both films were solid in their own ways. Tai Lung was a great "student-betrays-teacher" villain, while Lord Shen fit well as the "tormented, egomaniacal warlord" type.

reply